4.7 Article

Genomic Epidemiology Reconstructs the Introduction and Spread of Zika Virus in Central America and Mexico

期刊

CELL HOST & MICROBE
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 855-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2018.04.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council under the European Commission Seventh Framework Program (FP7)/European Research Council grant [614725-PATHPHYLODYN]
  2. Oxford Martin School
  3. Society in Science Branco Weiss Fellowship
  4. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [T32HD040128]
  5. National Library of Medicine of the NIH [R01LM010812, R01LM011965]
  6. Wellcome Trust
  7. Royal Society [204311/Z/16/Z]
  8. Abbott Laboratories
  9. NIH from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [R01AI099631, P01AI106695, U19 AI118610, R21AI129455]
  10. NIH from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01 HL105704]
  11. Wellcome Trust core award [203141/Z/16/Z]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Zika virus (ZIKV) epidemic in the Americas established ZIKV as a major public health threat and uncovered its association with severe diseases, including microcephaly. However, genetic epidemiology in some at-risk regions, particularly Central America and Mexico, remains limited. We report 61 ZIKV genomes from this region, generated using metagenomic sequencing with ZIKV-specific enrichment, and combine phylogenetic, epidemiological, and environmental data to reconstruct ZIKV transmission. These analyses revealed multiple independent ZIKV introductions to Central America and Mexico. One introduction, likely from Brazil via Honduras, led to most infections and the undetected spread of ZIKV through the region from late 2014. Multiple lines of evidence indicate biannual peaks of ZIKV transmission in the region, likely driven by varying local environmental conditions for mosquito vectors and herd immunity. The spatial and temporal heterogeneity of ZIKV transmission in Central America and Mexico challenges arbovirus surveillance and disease control measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据